Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Missing the point... (Score 1) 631

by tre4lien (#17584872) Attached to: Is DRM Intrinsically Distasteful?
I am shocked that comming in this late, I found no comments on what I consider the MOST important reason ALL DRM IS OFFENSIVE:
Restraint of development
It's not just DRM, it's a neccessary evil of mature capitalist organizations - you can't create a standard without trying to sabotage technology development in that area.

In fact, that's the whole business model behind DRM...
You are not to prevent dick from giving a copy to Jane, so much as prevent Dick from inventing a new use before you do that makes Jane stop thinking of you as the only source.

For example, If you are a television media company, you want to do anything you can to prevent someone from inventing a TIVO before you can figure out how to secure a monopoly in that market and control the release and development of that tech - otherwise you may not have a place in the new market at all.
If they do invent a TIVO, you have to do everything in you power to sabotage that new market so that you can regain control with a new, and (apparently) better thing.

Ideally, as a monopoly, you are the only one legally allowed to bring new technologies to market.

I really can't believe this question was taken seriously, then no one just spit out the bottom line:
Obviously all DRM is distasteful, it's whole purpose is to restrain technological human development.

I understand that many people feel that overall human development is not as important as immediate artist prosperity - I disagree, but I understand that view.
But even if I agreed with that view, it makes DRM no less distasteful, just "neccessary".

Finally, I have seen the argument that it is impossible to maintain artistic creation in a society without our current lottery of potentially large financial reward; to that, I say Bu11shit.

I don't give a damn about my right to personally evaluate "Fair Use" compared to my right to develop new uses and technologies from emerging standards!

Don't tell me how hard you work. Tell me how much you get done. -- James J. Ling